|
|
| |
Forum Overview
::
Motherfucking News
|
| |
|
by Senor Barborito 01/14/2005, 4:06am PST |
|
 |
|
 |
|
I'll see if I get dragged back to it this weekend.
Here is the main difference, I think, between the Life Aquatic you saw and the one I saw: you saw a funny, visually inspired, and surreal movie. I saw a moral wasteland revisiting the hipster failure to detach from one's parents and become an actual adult (instead of just older.) The deal with Shakes the Clown is, even though it opens with a kid pissing on Bobcat's head, it's a surprisingly moral movie, and there is nothing surreal about the motivations of the characters. You know that dry dry dry super dryly sarcastic guy that Life Aquatic is supposed to be that you're feeling, yo? I hate that guy's nihilism and cheap veneer of worldliness. I hate the way he does shit without any reason, because he thinks doing purposeless, incongruous shit is funny, instead of sad and hollow. Surrealism can reflect a warped world, or speak more clearly about difficult subjects using what are at first nonsensical props, but some surrealism - like the surrealism of Life Aquatic - seems to think that, noh-like, meaning will emerge from the nonsensical props themselves. For example: Shakes the Clown is a movie about stand-up comics using clowns as metaphor; Life Aquatic's oceanographers aren't a metaphor for anything. They're just oceanographers, pursuing nonsensical oceanographer business, reflecting no absurdity, symbolic of nothing whatsoever.
That particular trick is getting to be kind of old. Like Huggy Bear's educated thugs in Starsky and Hutch, or Alice Cooper holding forth on American history and government in Wayne's World, having characters with uncharacteristic specialities that lend no depth or even breadth is a known device and yes, it even can be funny. By Huggy Thug time it was already played out, though for Alice Cooper I think it was the last time on camera that a celebrity was praised for knowing about anything. But Life Aquatic seems to be a whole movie based on that joke: what if two dudes from Rushmore devoted 20 years of their life to the study of oceanography and marine biology? Thumbs down.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
GALLAGHER ATTACKS by Fussbett 01/12/2005, 8:59pm PST 
Gallagher apologetics. by Senor Barborito 01/12/2005, 9:12pm PST
Yes, if only we could see the real wit and political satire in Gallagher shows. NT by Creexul :( 01/12/2005, 9:23pm PST
Re: Gallagher apologetics. by Choson 01/12/2005, 9:32pm PST
Gallagher begat Carrot Top. by And this I do not forgive. 01/12/2005, 9:49pm PST
Re: Gallagher apologetics. by Ray of Light 01/12/2005, 10:04pm PST
No, dude, I'm calling bullshit on this. by Senor Barborito 01/13/2005, 8:04am PST
Re: No, dude, I'm calling bullshit on this. by Debate Fan 01/13/2005, 8:40am PST
Re: No, dude, I'm calling bullshit on this. by Ray of Light 01/13/2005, 12:06pm PST
Except I did see Life Aquatic Tuesday night. by Senor Barborito 01/13/2005, 4:59pm PST
You're INSANE NT by INSANE 01/13/2005, 6:01pm PST
You should write a count-review. I'll argue for days. NT by Fussbett 01/13/2005, 6:17pm PST
Counter-review. NT by Fussbett 01/13/2005, 6:17pm PST
Re: Counter-review. by Senor Barborito 01/14/2005, 4:06am PST
Notice that I deleted all refs to other movies. by Fussbett 01/14/2005, 9:29pm PST
Compelling. by Ray of Light 01/13/2005, 6:55pm PST
Napoleon Dynamite: movie of the year. NT by Creexul :( 01/13/2005, 6:56pm PST
Re: Compelling. by Choson 01/13/2005, 8:46pm PST
That's exactly what many people would think. by Ray of Light 01/13/2005, 11:23pm PST
Re: That's exactly what many people would think. by Senor Barborito 01/14/2005, 3:38am PST
content, spoilers by Ray of Light 01/14/2005, 11:30am PST
This thread is exposing my own rock-bottom self-esteem by Zseni 01/14/2005, 11:47am PST
Broken record and all, but Zseni still hasn't seen The Office. NT by Mysterio 01/14/2005, 6:12pm PST
Re: That's exactly what many people would think. by Choson 01/14/2005, 7:30am PST
Aren't you the one afraid of sex? NT by OPINION INVALIDATED 01/14/2005, 7:39am PST
To me, the definition of scary is posting under a regular nick. NT by Senor Barborito 01/14/2005, 7:42am PST
WHICH IS WHY YOU POST UNDER A CAJILLION? NT by ROFL-Meister 01/14/2005, 8:22am PST
You mean your opinion? NT by Choson 01/14/2005, 8:38am PST
*After school* Nu-uh! You! by Bill Dungsrom 01/14/2005, 5:36pm PST
Most appropriate nick ever? NT by Mysterio 01/14/2005, 8:41am PST
Re: That's exactly what many people would think. by Ray of Light 01/14/2005, 11:39am PST
The Life Aquatic is no Bottle Rocket! by Fussbett 01/14/2005, 5:23pm PST
Re: The Life Aquatic is no Bottle Rocket! by Choson 01/14/2005, 5:50pm PST
So have you married The Royal Tenenbaums yet? (why don't you?) by Fussbett 01/14/2005, 8:56pm PST
Zseni says your, OJECTIVELY, the coolest poster here! by Burble 01/15/2005, 4:50am PST
Re: So have you married The Royal Tenenbaums yet? (why don't you?) by Oh SNAP guy 01/15/2005, 10:16am PST
Re: So have you married The Royal Tenenbaums yet? (why don't you?) by Choson 01/15/2005, 10:17am PST
O SNAP, GUY! NT by whydirt 01/15/2005, 10:26am PST
Re: O SNAP, GUY! by Choson 01/15/2005, 10:42am PST
Truely bizzarre footnote by laudablepuss 05/18/2005, 8:59pm PDT
Gallagher has been perfectly judged. by Fussbett 01/12/2005, 10:55pm PST
Re: GALLAGHER ATTACKS by Bill Dungsroman 01/13/2005, 11:34am PST
|
|
| |
|
| |
